Studia Fennica Historica Edited by Petri Karonen and Marko Hakanen Personal Agency at the Swedish Age of Greatness 1560–1720 The Finnish Literature Society (SKS) was founded in 1831 and has, from the very beginning, engaged in publishing operations. It nowadays publishes literature in the fields of ethnology and folkloristics, linguistics, literary research and cultural history. The first volume of the Studia Fennica series appeared in 1933. Since 1992, the series has been divided into three thematic subseries: Ethnologica, Folkloristica and Linguistica. Two additional subseries were formed in 2002, Historica and Litteraria. The subseries Anthropologica was formed in 2007. In addition to its publishing activities, the Finnish Literature Society maintains research activities and infrastructures, an archive containing folklore and literary collections, a research library and promotes Finnish literature abroad. Studia Fennica Editorial Board Editors-in-chief Pasi Ihalainen, Professor, University of Jyväskylä, Finland Timo Kallinen, University Lecturer, University of Helsinki, Finland Taru Nordlund, Professor, University of Helsinki, Finland Riikka Rossi, Title of Docent, University Researcher, University of Helsinki, Finland Katriina Siivonen, Title of Docent, University Teacher, University of Turku, Finland Lotte Tarkka, Professor, University of Helsinki, Finland Deputy editors-in-chief Anne Heimo, Title of Docent, University of Turku, Finland Saija Isomaa, Professor, University of Tampere, Finland Sari Katajala-Peltomaa, Title of Docent, Researcher, University of Tampere, Finland Eerika Koskinen-Koivisto, Postdoctoral Researcher, Dr. Phil., University of Helsinki, Finland Laura Visapää, Title of Docent, University Lecturer, University of Helsinki, Finland Tuomas M. S. Lehtonen, Secretary General, Dr. Phil., Finnish Literature Society, Finland Tero Norkola, Publishing Director, Finnish Literature Society, Finland Virve Mertanen, Secretary of the Board, Finnish Literature Society, Finland oa.finlit.fi Editorial Office SKS P.O. Box 259 FI-00171 Helsinki www.finlit.fi Personal Agency at the Swedish Age of Greatness 1560–1720 Edited by Petri Karonen and Marko Hakanen Finnish Literature Society • SKS • Helsinki • 2017 studia fennica historica 23 The publication has undergone a peer review. The open access publication of this volume has received part funding via a Jane and Aatos Erkko Foundation grant. © 2017 Petri Karonen, Marko Hakanen and SKS License CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International A digital edition of a printed book first published in 2017 by the Finnish Literature Society. Cover Design: Timo Numminen EPUB: Tero Salmén ISBN 978-952-222-882-6 (Print) ISBN 978-952-222-954-0 (PDF) ISBN 978-952-222-953-3 (EPUB) ISSN 0085-6835 (Studia Fennica) ISSN 1458-526X (Studia Fennica Historica) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21435/sfh.23 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International License. To view a copy of the license, please visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ A free open access version of the book is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21435/sfh.23 or by scanning this QR code with your mobile device. 5 Contents Acknowledgements 7 Chronology of Swedish History 8 I Approaches and Perspectives Petri Karonen & Marko Hakanen Personal Agency and State Building in Sweden (1560–1720) 13 II Councillors of the Realm Marko Hakanen & Ulla Koskinen The Gentle Art of Counselling Monarchs (1560–1655) 47 III Royal Secretaries Marko Hakanen & Ulla Koskinen Secretaries as Agents in the Middle of Power Structures (1560–1680) 83 IV Governors Mirkka Lappalainen Loyal Servants of the King and the Crown (1620–1680): Stewards and Governors in Sweden before the Age of Absolutism 113 V Judges Olli Matikainen Judges, Law-Readers and Malpractice (1560–1680) 143 6 VI Bailiffs Janne Haikari The Bailiff: Between a Rock and a Hard Place (1600–1690)? 165 VII Clergy Mikko Hiljanen Servants of the Crown or Trustees of the People? Personal Agency Among the Local Clergy (1550–1610) 193 VIII Royal Mayors Petri Karonen Royal Mayors (1620–1700): The Bane of the Burghers, the Crown’s Scourge, Effective Developers of Urban Government? 219 IX Burgomasters Piia Einonen Burgomasters of Stockholm as Agents of the Crown and Self-Interest (1590–1640) 247 X Students Kustaa H. J. Vilkuna Study Abroad, The State and Personal Agency (1640–1700) 275 List of Contributors 297 Abstract 298 Index of Names 299 Index of Subjects 303 7 Acknowledgements T he origin of this volume lies in the discussions inside the research project “Personal Agency in the Age of State Building, Sweden c. 1550– 1650”, funded by the Academy of Finland (2011–2015). The aim of the project was to provide fresh insight into the state building process in Sweden in the transitional period c. 1550–1650. During those years, many far- reaching administrative reforms were carried out, and the Swedish state developed into a prime example of the early modern “power-state”. The project approached state building in early modern Sweden from the point of view of personal agency. This has long remained in the shadow of the study of structures and institutions. We believe that with this novel approach we will shed light on numerous important questions about the nature of administration and the possibilities of state formation. The emphasis on individuals also corresponds well with the the sixteenth-century reality. The powerful, all-pervasive centrally controlled structures that characterized the Swedish power state of the following century were simply not a reality in the sixteenth century. This anthology is result of those many fruitful discussions attached to the project, but also all the colleagues who were part of the projects network and those who participated the international Agency and State Building in the 16th and 17th centuries Conference held at University of Jyväskylä in November 2013. The editors wish to thank all the contributors for their insightful chapters, but also the diligence and forgiveness they have expressed during this long writing and editing process. It has been great privilege to work with all of you. The assembling this collected volume has also required linguistic support and we warmly thank all involved parties. The Finnish Literature Society deserves our acknowledgements for the easy and engaging cooperation. Finally, the editors would like to thank the anonymous evaluators whose remarks and suggestions have been very valuable. 8 Chronology of Swedish History 1397 Kalmar Union was established 1442 The Country Law of Christopher 1477 Uppsala University founded 1520 Stockholm Bloodbath 1521 Gustavus Vasa to the Protector of the Realm ( Riksföreståndare ) 1523 Gustavus Vasa declared as the King of Sweden (to 1560) 1523 Sweden’s declaration of independence from Kalmar Union 1527 The Diet at Västerås opened the door to the Reformation 1527 The church comes under the authority of monarchy 1542 Dacke War (uprising) (to 1543) 1544 Hereditary kingship 1554 Russo-Swedish War (to 1557) 1557 Treaty of Novgorod 1560 Eric XIV of Sweden (to 1568) 1561 Eric XIV introduce new noble titles: Count ( Greve ) and Baron ( Friherre ) 1563 Northern Seven Years’ War (to 1570) 1567 Sture murders 1568 John III of Sweden (to 1592) 1569 The nobility becomes hereditary 1570 Treaty of Stettin 1571 The Church Ordinance ( Kyrkoording ) confirms Protestant organization 1592 Sigismund of Poland as King of Sweden (to 1599, dethroned) 1592 Duke Charles to the protector of the Realm (to 1604) 1595 Treaty of Teusina 1596 Cudgel War (uprising) (to 1597) 1597 Duke Charles rebels against the King 1599 King Sigismund is declared deposed 1600 Polish War (to 1629) 1607 Charles IX (to 1611) 1610 Ingrian War (to 1617) 1611 Gustavus Adolphus (to 1632) gives a charter of guarantees 9 Chronology of Swedish History 1612 Axel Oxenstierna appointed as Lord High Chancellor of Sweden ( rikskanslern ) (to 1654) 1611 All of the high posts in civil administration guaranteed to the nobility by privileges 1614 The Svea Court of Appeal ( Svea hovrätt ) founded 1617 Treaty of Stolbovo 1617 Swedish Diet Act ( riksdagsordningen ) was given to regulate the Diet (the Riksdag) 1618 Thirty Years’ War (to 1648) 1623 The Turku Court of Appeal (Åbo hovrätt ) founded 1626 The House of Nobility ordinance 1629 Armistice of Altmark 1632 Gustavus Adolphus dies at battle of Lützen 1632 Regency ( Förmyndarregering ) (to 1644) 1634 The Instrument of Government, The Göta Court of Appeal ( Göta hovrätt ) founded 1635 The instruction for county governors ( Landshövdingeinstruktionen ) 1640 Academy of Turku is founded 1644 Christina of Sweden is proclaimed of age on her 18 th birthday and becomes Queen of Sweden 1648 Peace of Westphalia 1654 Queen Christina abdicate the throne 1654 Charles X Gustav (to 1660) 1655 Second Northern War (to 1661) 1658 Treaty of Roskilde 1660 Treaty of Oliva 1660 Treaty of Copenhagen 1660 Regency ( Förmyndarregering ) (to 1672) 1661 Treaty of Kardis 1668 Riksbank, first national bank in the world 1672 Charles XI (to 1697) is declared of age 1674 Scanian War (to 1679) 1680 The Great Reduction 1681 The Council of the Realm ( Riksrådet ) becomes Royal Council ( Kungligt råd ) 1696 The Great Famine in Finland, Norrland and in the Baltic Region 1697 Charles XII (to 1718) declared of age 1700 The Great Northern War (to 1721) 1709 Swedish army is defeated in Poltava 1720 Treaty of Frederiksborg 1721 Treaty of Nystad Approaches and Perspectives I 13 Petri Karonen http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6090-5504 Marko Hakanen http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4214-960X Personal Agency and State Building in Sweden (1560–1720) Structures, institutions and personal agency Who took care of the civil administration and ecclesiastical tasks in the kingdom of Sweden in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries? What kind of agency they performed in their official duties? What was the significance of the personal agency of officials in their usually unrewarding position between the government and local communities? In this book, early modern state building in Sweden is studied particularly from the point of view of personal agency and collective biography. This brings a new personal level to the much debated state building process, which has so far been mainly studied from a structural perspective. Macro-level studies have forgotten the practical significance of persons as agents, a factor which offers the opportunity to see the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century reality from a new point of view. In this period, the realm of Sweden saw significant progress in various areas of social activity. The major reason for this was simply the demands of wartime, which had forced the country into developing its activities. Practically speaking, Sweden was on a continuous war footing from 1560 to 1721, which in a country with poor resources and a small population caused a significant need for development. The whole of Swedish society had been harnessed to support the preparation for war and engagement in it and to a lesser extent the transition from war to peace. War, together with its after- and side-effects, was a significant factor in the formation of society and political life right up to the mid-eighteenth century. Our study deals with an era when centralized states of a new kind began to emerge in Europe. Internationally, the case of early modern Sweden is especially interesting as the state building process at the beginning of the seventeenth century transformed a locally dispersed and sparsely populated area into a strongly centralized absolute monarchy that possessed an overseas empire in Europe. 1 The Swedish state building process began in the sixteenth century, although the major structural changes were not implemented until the next century. The administrative system was mostly in place by the beginning of eighteenth century, when Sweden’s position as a great European power collapsed as a result of the Great Northern War (1700–1721). 14 Petri Karonen & Marko Hakanen From the point of view of state building, the sixteenth century was indeed chronologically a long one, and consequently the studies in this collection analyze the so-called “long great power period”, which in the case of this work embraces approximately the years 1560–1721. Many of the events connected with the development of Sweden’s external position took place in this period, but most importantly it was then that the central organizations and their individual actors that were crucial for the development of the state assumed their forms and functionalities. Concomitantly, many far-reaching administrative reforms were carried out during those years, and the Swedish state developed into a prime example of the early modern “power-state”. The time period chosen here does not follow the usual timelines, which have generally emphasized the sovereignty of the Swedish Crown and Gustavus Vasa’s (1496–1560) rise to power in the 1520s. 2 The chosen period does not, however, undermine the important steps taken by Gustavus Vasa. Among other things, he recruited several experts from Germany who were crucial in the formation period of the administra- tion in the 1530s. However, radical changes were not implemented until after 1560, which is also the starting point for this study. Thorough-going reforms in central and local government, state finances, the Church and everyday life likewise took place only in the latter half of the sixteenth century. This era of change continued into the seventeenth century. This book’s emphasis on individuals also corresponds well with the early modern reality. The powerful, all-pervasive centrally controlled structures that characterized the Swedish power state of the following century simply did not exist in the sixteenth century. The administration of the state lay in the execution of various tasks that the king delegated to his followers, and the most important posts, such as the lordship of castles and the government of territories were reserved for members of the nobility. During its time as a great power, Sweden was internally relatively peaceful, which gave it a competitive advantage over its neighbors with their greater resources. It was important for the unity of the Swedish realm that the position of the monarch was strong and that there were only a few truly powerful noble families in the country. Thus the ruler was able control the activities of the nobles and to regulate the successful development of the small towns by granting special rights (privileges). Noble privileges were important for many of those groups of office-holders who occupy a central place in this volume. Common (non-noble) servants of the Crown also received strong backing for their activities through authorizations and directions issued by the ruler, although no group could base its actions on such normative texts alone. Significant changes took place in the administrative system of the Swedish realm during the period studied in this work. Figure 1 shows the main features of these organizational changes: local and intermediary administration was mainly developed in the sixteenth century, while in the first decades of the seventeenth century the focus shifted to reinforcing the central administration. 3 The centralized system was also preserved in the period known as the Age of Liberty (1718–1772) that followed the Age of Absolutism (1680–1718), although in practice the focus of power 15 Personal Agency and State Building in Sweden (1560–1720) and political activity shifted significantly to the ruling estates and the Diet (which was composed of the representatives of the four estates: the Nobles, the Clergy, the Burghers and the Peasants). Even so, the organizations and practices in the central administration that had prevailed in the Age of Absolutism survived in the Age of Liberty. An illustrative example with regard to the distribution of resources is the Office of State ( Statskontoret ), which from the very outset was a monocratic agency, i.e. one in which the decisions were made by one state official. Previously the collegial system of governance had been adhered to according to the principle that no-one should be able to take decisions alone. 4 In the latter half of the sixteenth century and the early decades of the seventeenth, an administrative organization that worked well considering the conditions of the time was created in the capital, Stockholm. It was based on a system of collegiums (central agencies). The system was specifically designed to operate in wartime and to serve the needs of war. Sweden was forced by the continual wars to transform itself into a new kind of state, one that could exploit its scarce material resources. In practice, the state extended its strict control throughout the whole of society. This intensification of administration and control considerably increased the number of offices and administrative units. A concentrated, relatively simple and clear structure ensured what was for the period an effective communication of information and orders from the summit of government down to the remote regions and back. Taken as a whole, the system was in its time the most efficient in Europe. Later the Swedish model was copied in both Denmark and Russia. In the mid-seventeenth century there were about 700 civil service posts (including those of officials serving in castles), while around 1730 the number of posts was about one thousand. 5 The reorganization of the position of the Church had occupied a central position in the foundations of Gustavus Vasa’s state structure. In Sweden, the ecclesiastical administration had been established according to the Roman Catholic model as an independent concentration of power that enjoyed special rights in the secular sphere as well: for example, the bishops held a strong position in the Council of the Realm ( Riksrådet ). The heavy debts of the Swedish Crown and the huge property of the Church enticed Gustavus Vasa first into reforming the organizational and economic structure of the Church and subsequently into extending these reforms into a full-scale reformation. The Diet of 1527 opened the door to the Reformation, and a large part of the Church’s property was transferred to the Crown and the nobles who supported the King. The political power of the Church was crushed, and there was a swift shift to a Lutheran people’s church with the King at its head. Naturally, ties with the Vatican were broken. The bishops were ejected from the Council of the Realm, which became mainly the seat of the King’s noble advisers. 6 In the period studied here, the bishops were appointed by the ruler. However, the bishops who were in charge of dioceses still possessed considerable power, for example in choosing their direct subordinates. The cathedral chapter ( consistorium ecclesiasticum ) was the highest administrative organ in the diocese and it possessed judicial power all in 16 Petri Karonen & Marko Hakanen cases that came under the jurisdiction of the Church. In the early part of the period under investigation here, the cathedral chapters were for the most part mainly stooges of the bishops, but the situation changed before the mid-seventeenth century, when the collegial system that prevailed in the state administration was adopted by the Church as well. The cathedral chapters had considerable power in the appointment of clergymen for the parishes, especially if the diocese was a consistorial one, when the choice of a clergyman was jointly made by the chapter and the parishioners. In patronage parishes, on the other hand, the appointment was entrusted to a leading local noble, and in royal parishes to the ruler alone. In any case, the Church continued, despite the Reformation, to hold a significant position in the local community and also to wield some administrative and judicial power. 7 In the short run, the Reformation weakened the educational system, which had been administered by the Church, but by the seventeenth century it had become necessary to develop education at all levels and to provide resources for it. The ever-expanding realm, the continuous warring, the growing bureaucratic machinery and the concomitantly intensifying control at all levels of society required a constant supply of educated new clergymen to communicate the official message and political education of the Crown to all subjects in every corner of the realm. The pressure gradually pushed the educational system throughout the country into reform and expansion with the aim of producing professional officials in both ecclesiastical and secular administration. In Sweden and Finland, we cannot speak of the profession of civil servant until the nineteenth century, when the criteria pertaining to the qualifications for a civil servant were defined. 8 Even so, many of the groups and persons studied in this work are called civil servants, functionaries or officials because the functions and limits of their work were defined in official guidelines. 9 The administrative changes that began in earnest in Sweden in the early seventeenth century meant an increase in bureaucracy and a change in the position of functionaries. Their activities started to be governed by official rules, and attention began to be paid to their qualifications. However, through the awarding of privileges accorded to the nobility, the highest posts passed over to that estate, whose members had previously sought above all to pursue a military career. Thus in 1569 John III (1537–1592) awarded considerable advantages to the higher nobility in particular, but at the same time the members of this estate were required not only to engage in military service but also to take a greater part in administration both in the royal court and in the provinces. Subsequently, in 1611, 1612 and 1617, Gustavus Adolphus (1594–1632) promised that all the “high posts” ( höga ämbeten ) would remain in the hands of the nobility and that many other duties should also preferably ( hälst af ) be entrusted to nobles. The Instrument of Government 1634 ( regeringsform ), which was of central importance in the administrative reorganization of the realm, marked off a large number of posts in central and local government and in the judiciary 17 Personal Agency and State Building in Sweden (1560–1720) for members of the nobility, although there are very few direct mentions of this in this important document. 10 Appointments to official posts were linked to expertise and education, although the reality was to some extent different as a result of clientage networks. The higher estates kept a strong hold over the hubs of power, and thanks to the status they enjoyed the civil service professions continued to maintain close contact with the ruling class. However, the privileges that went with official posts were no longer the sole preserve of a single estate, but were now rather reserved within the family and the clan. 11 In terms of numbers, there might have been enough members of the nobility to man the civil service, but the army took the vast majority of the potential candidates, and for the rest of the available nobles a general inability to handle the posts was an impediment. As the administrative machinery swelled, the situation soon became difficult. 12 The development and growth of university education took place alongside the increase in the number of official posts, and the ruler was forced to elevate university-educated lower functionaries with ecclesiastical or bourgeois backgrounds to the nobility so that higher posts in central and local government might be open to them. 13 The increased significance of education did not, however, lead directly to the creation of a civil service profession, in which expertise gained through education constituted the qualification for functioning as an office-holder. Formal competence requirements only became common in the Nordic countries, and indeed elsewhere, from the eighteenth century on. 14 The application of merits as a qualification for official posts was to some extent impossible in the seventeenth century because no criteria for the necessary competences had been established. The regulations mainly concerned times and ways of working. For example, the qualifications for lawyers working in the courts of appeal did not require a university education. All in all, then, suitably trained men were needed for many judicial and administrative posts and for the collection and registration of taxes: indeed, in many cases, sound experience alone was qualification enough. 15 Interaction, conflict and agency State building has been studied from numerous points of view in both the European and the Swedish contexts. The traditional approach, concentrating on the actions of kings and other rulers, has broadened to encompass conditions at the local level, which largely determined the extent of the central government’s power. The relationship between kings and their subjects has been described as a form of bargaining. Depending on the point of view adopted, researchers have emphasized either the “top-down” model, represented, in the Swedish context, in a strong-power state in the seventeenth century, or the “bottom-up” model, in which the subjects are the decisive factor behind all state organization. 16 In an agrarian state like Sweden, the Crown had to have an efficient machinery of taxation and control in order to carry out its ambitious 18 Petri Karonen & Marko Hakanen plans. In many states, like the Dutch Republic, with a largely monetary economy, funds could be collected through quickly improvised temporary arrangements, but this was not possible in Sweden. According to Charles Tilly, war and preparation for it were in a key position in the actual process of state building. He asserts that states that based their activities mainly on coercion and the use of armed force had to create massive administrative machineries in order to efficiently gather the taxes and men needed to wage war. Such states were, according to Tilly, often agrarian and little urbanized. At the general level, this categorization would seem to describe Sweden in the era studied here, although the typology is too strict. Sweden at that time certainly lacked capital, the cities were weak, the land was centrally governed and Swedish society was militarized. Even so, it is difficult to regard the state of Sweden as being based on “coercion” since there was also an undeniable need for negotiation and compromise. The chapters in this volume for their part bring new perspectives on these phenomena and processes. 17 From the 1970s on, there has been extensive discussion on the nature of the relationship of subordination between the rulers (élites) and the ruled in the Nordic countries during the early modern period. Put simply, the interpretations are mainly divided between the “interaction model” and the “military state model”: the former approach stresses the importance of negotiation and interaction, while the latter underlines coercion and a general focus on the military sphere. However, both of these major characteristics were present in Swedish society during the early modern period, and consequently the ‘truth’ lies somewhere between these two extremes. Since the beginning of the 21st century, intermediate views have also appeared, but research has not yet reached any final conclusion on this issue. 18 In general, the ruler-ruled relationship seems to have been a quite viable one, especially during the Great Power period. For instance, there were few major violent conflicts in the Kingdom of Sweden during the period under investigation. 19 Most of the people were represented at the four-estate Diet, in whose meetings representatives of all the four estates in society from all corners of the realm participated and could decide on matters freely, at least in theory. The relationship between the Crown and the Diet was normally based exclusively either on positive interaction and negotiation or the imposition of the king’s authority. In practice, the relationship was a combination of both and varied according to the circumstances. During the period of intense conquest (approx. 1600−1660), the rulers were constantly obliged to turn to the estates with requests to levy new taxes and draft new men into the army. It was during the heaviest periods of warfare that the interaction between the monarch, or a regency acting for him or her, and the people was most intense. The role of individuals in state building has been mostly overlooked in previous research. A widely accepted idea is that the scope for action of the central power was circumscribed because it had to legitimate its power and integrate the subjects into the decision-making processes. The approaches taken by earlier research have not permitted a synthesis between agents and institutions. We believe that studying persons and their actions can reveal 19 Personal Agency and State Building in Sweden (1560–1720) new mechanisms of the distribution of power in practice and the dynamics of networks of influence. 20 The much discussed subject of state building needs new basic research at the micro-level that focuses on the concrete manifestations of the phenomenon. The broad outlines and structural development have already been well researched at the macro level especially with regard to political events and war history. The basic problem of the current picture is that state building is usually seen as an institutional process that develops inexorably, following its own internal logic. The role of persons at different levels of society in initiating and realizing the process of state building has largely remained uninvestigated. The point of view of personal agency has long remained in the shadow of the study of structures and institutions. We believe that by adopting this novel perspective we can shed light on numerous important questions about the nature of administration and the conditions of state-formation. The emphasis on individuals also corresponds well with the sixteenth-century reality. The powerful, all-pervasive, centrally controlled structures that characterized the Swedish power state of the following century simply did not exist in the sixteenth century. Administration consisted in the execution of various tasks that the king delegated to his followers. The concept “agency” has been widely used, especially in sociology, economics and political science, 21 and indeed it is the perspectives of sociology that are most closely akin to the approaches adopted in this volume. In sociology, the concept has a long history, going back to the studies of Max Weber. 22 Edgar Kiser has reviewed the varieties of agency theory in different disciplines and found that the approaches differ considerably. According to Kiser, “Agency theory is a general model of social relations involving the delegation of authority, and generally resulting in problems of control, which has been applied to a broad range of substantive contexts.” 23 However, even in sociology, there are differing conceptions of how “the relationship between ‘the individual’ and ‘society’, or ‘social structure’” is to be seen and valued. For example, according to S. Barry Barnes, “The central problems of sociology are actually problems of collective agency.” For Barnes, it is a question particularly of collective agency since his approach is an “anti-individualist” one, 24 Likewise, Stephan Fuchs is suspicious of personal agency “at least when it comes to explaining society and culture.” However, he notes, clearly with justification, “Agency and structure, and micro/macro, are not opposite natural kinds but variations along a continuum.” He also interestingly suggests: “As a variable, ‘agency’ increases when the numbers are small, the distance is short, the relations are intimate, and the observer takes an intentional stance [... while] ‘structure’ increases when the numbers get larger, the distance between observer and referent becomes longer, and the observer employs more mechanical and deterministic explanatory frames.” 25 Rational choice theory actually consists of a set of theories, some of which have been imported from economics. The governing principle of rational choice theory is utility maximization: an individual makes choices based on reasoning, weighing costs against benefits. This controversial 20 Petri Karonen & Marko Hakanen theory has also been accused of over-simplifying human behavior. 26 Aware of the criticism, we use rational choice theory merely as a tool and in a modified form to emphasize the role of private agency in administrative structures. We take into account the fact that choices are culturally bound to values, ideals, norms and emotions, which causes humans often to act in a seemingly irrational way. “Rational” does not have to mean adherence to some traditional, often economically understood logic. What is important is that the theory regards human action as rational as opposed to random. Costs and benefits can vary from economic to symbolic or social. We use the theory as a hypothetical implement to evaluate the real choices that individuals made against the ideal, rational ones. In this way, we can analyze their actions at a deeper level and get fuller answers about the functioning of society. We believe that, applied in a modified form to early modern history, rational choice theory can help conceptualize different forms of individual agency. Taking the basic concept of rational choice to a deeper level, rational reasoning can here include cultural factors like honor and life style as determined by status. The concept of rational choice provides a tool to analyze individual actions and, knowing the outcome, to estimate how successful they were. It helps us to understand the choices early modern individuals made and to analyze their reasons for making them. We also use this theory to create unity between our separate studies of biographies that highlight different aspects of the state-building process. We want to explore whether the theory can help to reveal patterns of individual agency: individuals in similar positions in similar situations make similar choices because the costs and benefits are similar. Agency theory in economics treats information as a commodity that can be purchased and exchanged. In this respect, it is analogous to the patron-client networks in the early modern period. 27 “Agency” is one of the key concepts in this anthology, even when it is not directly mentioned, because when we analyze personal (conscious or unconscious) actions within the state-building process it is always a direct result of human actions, even when it is unintended. Agency connected to the “self ” opens up people’s decision making and actions to closer analysis, and through social interaction, intervention or influence it is possible to map out individual agency in the state building process. Moreover, when we combine personal agency with a collective approach dealing with particular groups, we can understand much better how the state structures were built. 28 State building was a more diversified and personalized process than has previously been assumed. In the case of Sweden, the state formation process has often been presented as an ongoing evolution directed by the ruler and his closest counselors or institutions, However, numerous individuals – noblemen, office-holders, etc. – were also crucially important actors in the process, and the development itself was not a straightforward progression but fundamentally intertwined with the ability and activeness of these “lower-level” actors. Consequently, this research re-evaluates the process of state building by focusing on actors and individuals rather than macro-level institutions.